Cited by 293Diabetes Management and EducationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDiabetes Management and Research

Do automated calls with nurse follow-up improve self-care and glycemic control among vulnerable patients with diabetes?

Open access
Piette, John D, Weinberger, Morris, McPhee, Stephen J, Mah, Connie A, Kraemer, Fredric B, Crapo, Lawrence M·2000·The American Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Purpose We sought to evaluate the effect of automated telephone assessment and self-care education calls with nurse follow-up on the management of diabetes. Subjects and methods We enrolled 280 English- or Spanish-speaking adults with diabetes who were using hypoglycemic medications and who were treated in a county health care system. Patients were randomly assigned to usual care or to receive an intervention that consisted of usual care plus bi-weekly automated assessment and self-care education calls with telephone follow-up by a nurse educator. Outcomes measured at 12 months included survey-reported self-care, perceived glycemic control, and symptoms, as well as glycosylated hemoglobin (Hb A1c) and serum glucose levels. Results We collected follow-up data for 89% of enrollees (248 patients). Compared with usual care patients, intervention patients reported more frequent glucose monitoring, foot inspection, and weight monitoring, and fewer problems with medication adherence (all P -0.03). Follow-up Hb A,, levels were 0.3% lower in the intervention group (P = 0.1), and about twice as many intervention patients had Hb A1c levels within the normal range (P = 0.04). Serum glucose levels were 41 mg/dL lower among intervention patients than usual care patients (P = 0.002). Intervention patients also reported better glycemic control (P = 0.005) and fewer diabetic symptoms (P Conclusions Automated calls with telephone nurse follow-up may be an effective strategy for improving self-…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00298-3

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Piette, J. D., Weinberger, M., McPhee, S. J., Mah, C. A., Kraemer, F. B., & Crapo, L. M.
Affiliations
  • VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
  • Regenstrief Institute (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Piette, John D
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-01
Volume
108
Issue
1
Pages
20-27
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139826204
Cited by
293
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
diabetes management, nurse follow-up, self-care education, glycemic control, HbA1c, hypoglycemic medications, medication adherence, glucose monitoring, vulnerable patients, Spanish-speaking patients, diabetic symptoms
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nurses, Patient Education as Topic, Self Care, Telephone, Translations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review